There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
(02-22-2011, 06:10 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: Your claim - in so many words - is that anyone who hasn't "beat the gay" or "prayed the gay" (where "the gay" is the disordered attraction to members of the same sex) out of themselves can't be a Christian, right?

The intellectually honest conclusion of what you are saying is in fact this:  If someone has a pre-disposition to a sin for whatever reason (psychological, environmental, etc.) unless they get rid of that pre-disposition they can't be Christian because, according to you, of 1 Cor.  Take a fornicator.  If someone continues to be inordinately horny, they are necessarily rejecting the grace of Christ I suppose?  That sounds quasi-heretical to me, to be honest with you.  I'll be happy to explain why if you don't know.

If not, then why the special treatment of homosexuals and not fornicators or liars?  Aren't all those problems mentioned together?

And that's why I suspect we will have to go back to 1 Cor and why you are dependent on it.  The distinction you need for your argument to hold is that effeminate is a sin of "identity" whereas fornicator is not.  That's why you are insistent that St. Paul is condemning "homosexuals" instead of those lacking virtue when he refers to malakoi.

Maybe you'll surprise me though.  Maybe you won't make a distinction between those things.  It will be an interesting answer if you don't...

You contradict yourself and continually misrepresent my position.  I am beginning to think you haven't even so much as read my previous posts in this thread because you ignore the arguments you can't refute and keep stating I expect all concupiscience to leave the true believer.

I have stated from the beginning:  there is no such theological category as a "homosexual person" and you cannot cite any proof to the contrary from Tradition.  You still have not addressed "such were some of you" and "they that do such things are worthy of death."  One must be either a Christian or a homosexual, but not both.  The issue is the properties belonging to the new birth, which you also artfully avoid over and over again.  One cannot be a homosexual if one is a new creature in Christ. He may struggle with temptations and great trials of nature and mortification, but he cannot BE a homosexual if he is a new creature in Christ. 

Quote:Take a fornicator.  If someone continues to be inordinately horny, they are necessarily rejecting the grace of Christ I suppose?  That sounds quasi-heretical to me, to be honest with you.  I'll be happy to explain why if you don't know.

Fornicators will not inherit the kingdom of God and yet here you are claiming that they are receiving grace.  Not while they are practioners of this sin!   If I should say, "I am a fornicator and a Christian", St. Paul teaches that I am in mortal sin:

Know you not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.   Or know you not, that he who is joined to a harlot, is made one body? For they shall be, saith he, two in one flesh.  But he who is joined to the Lord, is one spirit.  Fly fornication. Every sin that a man doth, is without the body; but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his own body. 1 Cor. 6:15-18

Again, you are either a Christian or a fornicator, and here you appear to join them together as though penance were unneccesary or that the Holy Spirit  would unite Himself to a practicing fornicator.  Now if he is no longer practicing, why did you call him a fornicator?  Again, "such were some of you."  The former fornicator may have grievous temptations and seasons of necessary mortification but he is a new creature in Christ Jesus, Who has made all things new.  Absolution most surely confers the gift of justice and innocence, and removes the guilt.  Therefore the Priest in the stead of Christ says in the absolution, "I forgive you all of your sins."  How then can you call him whom Christ has washed, sanctified and justified (1 Cor. 6:11) a fornicator?  Who is the accuser of the brethren?  Christ?  His Church?  His ministers?  No, the devil and his angels.  Therefore it is completey wrong to call an absolved and righteous man a fornicator and it is equally wrong to call an absolved person a homosexual, effeminate, molle, boy prostitute, _____________.

Even the CCC (2359) says "homosexual persons" are called to chastity.  Then listen to the CCC's definition of chastity:

Chastity means the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being. (2337)
How then can one called to be conformed to the image of Christ integrate [homo]sexuality with his bodily and spiritual being, if even the CCC calls the acts of homosexuality "gravely disordered" and the Fathers and Doctors call it the sin against nature?  Does not the Eucharist divinize the faithful recipient? (2 Peter 1:4)

CCC 2333:
Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity. Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. The harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.

How then with this definition should we counsel a "homosexual person" to live chastely as a "homosexual person" if he is called to accept his sexual identity which is complimentary and not symmetrical?
[/quote]
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Catholic Johnny - 02-22-2011, 09:45 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)